Fox News "Sunday Morning Features" - Transcript Interview with Ron Johnson
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Senator, it's good to see you this morning. Thanks very much for joining us.
Can you tell us where a phase four agreement stands this morning?
SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-WI): Well, good morning, Maria.
Well, when Nancy Pelosi passed a $3 trillion -- her HEROES package, literally just a couple of weeks after we had already concluded four other packages worth $2.9 trillion, I pretty well assumed at that point in time that Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the Democrats just simply weren't serious about really providing effective relief.
One of the things I have tried to point out is just the macroeconomics of what we have already done; $2.9 trillion is about 13.5 percent of last year's economy. Employment is down 10.5 percent. Economic forecasts are saying that we will see shrinkage in our economy somewhere between 4.6 and 7 percent.
And yet we have already passed 13.5 percent of our economy in terms of relief. And now she wants to tack on another $3 trillion, and basically another 13, 14 percent.
It's just not a serious proposal. And I just made the assumption that they really weren't ever going to negotiate in good faith. And it's really tragic.
I was on the floor of the Senate on Thursday offering a -- to pass something on a unanimous consent basis to extend federal plus-up of unemployment, not at the 600 level -- $600 level that has been very disincentivizing for people to reenter the work force. They said no to that.
And then Martha McSally just -- so, again, we wouldn't leave any people -- anybody in the lurch, offered to just extend the current $600 for a week, so we can negotiate. And they said no to that.
So, I think their obstruction, their unwillingness to really work with us in good faith, I think, is pretty obvious and speaks volumes that they're interested in the election issue.
BARTIROMO: But -- but...
JOHNSON: They think they have got the upper hand right now, and they'd rather not do anything, and not help people, as opposed to having the election issue.
It's very sad. It's very cynical.
BARTIROMO: So, will the -- so, will the GOP have to go along with extending that $600 a week? Other sources told me that there is a conversation about the PPP, putting more money into that program, but making sure that it's only available to small businesses that are hurting.
For example, one lawmaker told me that, if revenue is down year over year by 50 percent, then you're eligible for the PPP. Is that right? And what about that $600? Are you going to ultimately just agree that you have to continue this?
JOHNSON: I hope not, because that $600 is pretty destructive to our economic recovery. If we do nothing, you will -- people will still have and be able to take advantage of state unemployment benefits.
One thing I mentioned on the floor of the Senate, as they were saying no to my unanimous consent request for either a federal plus-up equal to two- thirds of somebody's weekly wage or the $200 flat fee, and give the states the option on that, I pointed out that, in 2009, during the Great Recession, Democrats, when they controlled everything, plussed up unemployment by $25 a week.
So, right now, they're saying, our $200 offer is inadequate. It's eight times higher than what they did in 2009. So, again, they're just simply not serious.
When it comes to PPP, I think that's largely the proposal right now, to make sure that we really direct it to those individuals who truly need it.
What I would tack on to that is a limit on forgiveness, to the extent that people make a profit. If you have taxable income, I think, to the extent you have taxable income, you should pay that portion of the PPP loan back. And if you're a nonprofit, to the extent your net assets increase, you should also pay that PPP loan back, because to the extent that we send a dollar to somebody who doesn't need it, that's a dollar that's not available to an individual or a business that truly does need it.
BARTIROMO: Right.
Senator, we will be watching. These negotiations are ongoing, obviously. And you have got until, I guess, August 7, before you leave again for a recess.
I want to get your take on your other major work. And that is your investigation into the transition from the Obama administration to the Trump administration and your investigation into the conflict of interests around Hunter Biden as it relates to Burisma and Ukraine.
We had more evidence this week that the FBI knew that the dossier was garbage, that it was just hearsay and made up in a bar. And yet Jim Comey and his colleagues kept pressing forward to re-up warrants to spy on Carter Page and get a window into the Trump campaign.
Tell me about that and what the latest is on that story. And, by the way, while you're doing your investigation, your colleagues on the left are trying to take you down with a disinformation campaign.
JOHNSON: Well, again, we're trying to assemble a puzzle.
We -- I think we basically know what this picture is, but we're trying to get all the pieces of the puzzle. And, of course, Democrats have a huge advantage of us in our investigation. Some of them know exactly what they did. They know where the balls are hidden. And they have done a pretty effective job hiding the ball.
One of our problems is obtaining documents from these agencies. And, Maria, understand, I mean, I will posit this question to you. How many people in the State Department do you think voted for Hillary Clinton vs. voted for President Trump?
I can't tell you my frustration how difficult it is getting information out of agencies that are supposedly controlled by this administration, but simply aren't.
BARTIROMO: Mm-hmm.
JOHNSON: And so they know exactly what they did. They're being -- they're doing a very good job of delaying our ability to obtain the information.
But we are starting to fill in the pieces of the puzzle here. For example, now we do know that these initial briefings with President Trump were really part and parcel of investigation into President Trump.
BARTIROMO: Right.
JOHNSON: So, what we have done this week is, we issued four letters.
They, of course, got leaked, not by us, but they got leaked. But we are getting far more granular, far more specific in our requests for information as we learn more.
And I'm actually hoping that the White House gets engaged and gets into those agencies and just makes sure that we finally -- that the American people finally get to understand and see the full picture of the corruption in the transition process that occurred.
BARTIROMO: We have copies of those letters. Let's show them on air, because you are asking -- and you sent a letter to Secretary Pompeo. You sent a letter to Secretary Haspel. You sent a letter to Bill Barr.
And you're asking for all records related to Christopher Steele's contact with the State Department. You're asking for records related to meetings or communications between Glenn Simpson and State Department officials.
You also want to know about Stefan Halper and what Stefan Halper was paid. I know that the Office of Net Assessments paid out initially $244,000 to Stefan Halper to write a report on China and Russia.
Can you tell me a little about that?
JOHNSON: Well, again, what we are doing is, we're becoming much more specific in our requests.
I got subpoena authority that was quite broad. The members of my committee wanted us to first try and get the information on a voluntary basis. We have been doing that for the last month.
But I'm losing my patience. We have given people every opportunity. Personally, I'd be surprised if you didn't start seeing us issue some subpoenas to some individuals in some of these agencies.
But, no, we are -- we have learned more. We have gotten more specific in our requests. Some of our requests are broad, because we just don't know what we don't know. We don't know what we're really asking for. But some of our requests are very specific.
There's probably not that much information. These agencies should be able to get that information. They probably already have it. There's probably classification issues.
BARTIROMO: Right.
JOHNSON: Or they will use classification as an excuse not to give it to us.
But we're pressing for it. I'm -- again, I'm losing my patience. We're going to start compelling some of this probably in the near future.
BARTIROMO: So, in other words, you're going to do subpoenas next week? Will you issue subpoenas next week?
JOHNSON: Well, it wouldn't surprise me if we start issuing subpoenas. It's a real possibility.
BARTIROMO: OK.
In the past, we have spoken about the transition period, with the unmasking. And I have asked you repeatedly, how high up the ladder does it go?
I had a chance to ask Valerie Jarrett that question this past week on "Mornings With Maria" over on FOX Business. I want to play this exchange for you. And then I want to ask you that question again.
Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Did President Obama direct any of this?
VALERIE JARRETT, FORMER SENIOR PRESIDENTIAL ADVISER: That's not how it works. That's not how our investigations work, that we leave that to the intelligence community to bring forward information.
And the dossier, I would imagine, would be one piece of a much bigger puzzle.
And so, if you're saying, is it important to make sure that there isn't influence -- and, actually, the Mueller report didn't conclude that there wasn't any wrongdoing. In fact, he was explicit in saying quite the opposite.
And so I don't think we should read in where...
BARTIROMO: Well...
(CROSSTALK)
JARRETT: ... there hasn't been actually any conclusion to that effect yet.
You're making statements that actually haven't been proven...
(CROSSTALK)
BARTIROMO: Just to be clear -- just to be clear, Robert Mueller said no collusion.
Michael Horowitz, the I.G. of the FBI, said that the dossier was -- quote, unquote -- "an essential piece" of all of this investigating of the Trump campaign. Essential piece was the word Michael Horowitz use.
So, you say it was part of a larger mosaic. We have no evidence of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Senator, this is the first time we have heard from the Obama administration. She said it doesn't work that way.
JOHNSON: Well, you will notice she didn't answer your question.
She just talked about, in general, what the process should be. That's not the process they followed. It is very clear that there was corruption at the highest levels of, certainly, the FBI. We have evidence of it.
I'm looking forward to John Durham wrapping up his investigation. I personally believe that the intelligence community was involved in this thing.
Their initial goal was to exonerate Hillary Clinton, when -- so that she could win the election.
When she lost the election, their goals shifted to first -- first and foremost, I think, sabotaging the Trump administration, which they have done a pretty good job of, also, I think initiating this diversionary operation, the smokescreen to cover up their wrongdoing...
BARTIROMO: Right.
JOHNSON: ... the fact that they -- they used all the awesome powers of their agencies to investigate their political opponent. They didn't want that revealed. It's being revealed right now.
So, again, Valerie Jarrett simply isn't answering the question. That's our job. We need to get the information. But, as I stated earlier, they still have so many of their supporters in these agencies. They are doing a pretty good job at hiding the ball.
It's hard to extract the information. But I'm a pretty tenacious guy.
BARTIROMO: All right, Senator, we know that. And we will be following your investigation.
Thank you, sir, Senator Ron Johnson.
We will be right back.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source